Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Daniel Butzu <dbutzu@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Re: A proposal to get out of this mess
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:24:00
Message-Id: 411a9f890801200623o32beb65bva1ac54b534359c36@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-project] Re: Re: A proposal to get out of this mess by Steve Long
1 On 1/20/08, Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote:
2 > Daniel Butzu wrote:
3 >
4 > > On 1/19/08, Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote:
5 > >
6 > >> For the record: I'd still like drobbins involved, but I don't think his
7 > >> terms were at all reasonable, and the way he went about it was
8 > >> reprehensible imo. It was designed to cause the furore it did, and only
9 > >> makes me give credence to the argument that much of the negative press on
10 > >> distrowatch has come from an associate of his. It was a totally political
11 > >> move, and not at all motivated by concern for Gentoo afaic. If he cared
12 > >> that much, he'd have approached Mr Goodyear privately or on the nfp list
13 > >> if he wanted to be "open". Not put everyone through all this stress.
14 > >>
15 > > Maybe. However, since it caused the furore it did it seems that a lot
16 > > of users were unsatisfied.
17 >
18 > >> Users used to feel just as excluded when drobbins was in charge
19 > There appears to be some myth going round that everything was sweetness and
20 > light back in those days; it's not true, and further the distro was an
21 > absolute pig to maintain:
22 > <long time user> "I used Gentoo when it was version 0.7, which was omg
23 > broken. Packages were added to portage and this would be stable, that would
24 > not compile at all. Then you had to re-sync to compile it, so in a day, you
25 > would need to re-sync portage 3 or 4 times to get everything to compile. :P
26 > ..Even still back in the 1.4 days, people really had no idea what to do."
27 >
28 > > You can't stir up something when there is nothing to stir up.
29 >
30 > Actually I think this whole drama shows that you can, or at least you can
31 > draw attention to one thing (lack of paperwork) and pretend it means
32 > something else (Gentoo is dying! Again!) People like drama.
33 >
34 > > So maybe we should focus more on our problems today, since we were unable
35 > > of doing it yesterday.
36 >
37 > Er yeah, maybe you'd like to discuss those then? That was what the rest of
38 > my mail was about.
39 >
40 > >> I've openly stated that I think user involvement and conduct on the dev
41 > >> m-l are the biggest problems I see.
42 >
43 > As in, how do we constructively change those? Or do you believe that can
44 > only be done by drobbins taking exclusive ownership of everyone's code?
45 >
46 >
47 >
48 > --
49 > gentoo-project@l.g.o mailing list
50 >
51 >
52
53 I think there is something wrong with your knode since it is putting
54 into my mouth some words that I didn't say. When writing a mixed reply
55 is not enough to mention the name of only one initial sender.
56 --
57 gentoo-project@l.g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-project] Re: Re: Re: A proposal to get out of this mess Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk>